On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 05:39, <phi...@apache.org> wrote:
>...
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql Wed Sep 22 09:39:45
> 2010
> @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ update nodes set properties = ?3
> where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2
> and op_depth in
> (select op_depth from nodes
> - where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2
> + where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2 and op_depth > 0
> order by op_depth desc
> limit 1);
Wouldn't it be better to do:
where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2
and op_depth = (select max(op_depth) from nodes
where wc_id=?1 and local_relpath=?2 and op_depth > 0);
It seems that eliminating the "order by" and "limit", in favor of
max() will tell sqlite what we're really searching for: the maximal
value.
Also note that the above query uses "op_depth in (...)"
yet:
>
> @@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ WHERE wc_id = ?1 AND local_relpath = ?2;
> update nodes set translated_size = ?3, last_mod_time = ?4
> where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2
> and op_depth = (select op_depth from nodes
> - where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2
> + where wc_id = ?1 and local_relpath = ?2 and op_depth > 0
> order by op_depth desc
> limit 1);
This one does not. The rest of the statements you converted all use
the "in" variant.
>...
Cheers,
-g
